They're learning the ins and out for programming on a new piece of hardware they are combining their portable and home console divisions, they are co building and starting up an online infrastructure for the first time they are in the process of finishing shipping the last of the wii u and 3ds games and hardware and they are square in the middle of the press blitz for the switch. They're a little busy.

Like I get what people are saying about the launch lineup its flippin abysmal but hey guess what they all are. Most systems have one maybe 2 games worth grabbing at launch the switch has Zelda so they've fulfilled their quota. Would it be nice if it was better? Yes, did anyone expect more? Not really.

If I were you, I'd cancel that pre-order for the Switch and try to find a new Wii U. Failing that, I'd buy a used Wii U from Gamestop or something, and then start going through the Wii U's backlog and buy Breath of the Wild - that's probably the best Nintendo fix anyone who skipped the Wii U and was hoping to get a Switch could go for right now. At this point, the Wii U does have a decent library of games to play (right at the end of its lifespan!)

Nintendo promised that Arms would have "depth, challenge, and replayability" or something to that effect, but I was let down as soon as I saw that. I thought they meant something I could sink my teeth into, not something that I'd play for twenty minutes with a friend, as opposed to the five minutes I might spend playing 1, 2, Switch.

Pretty much every console launch and first year has felt lacking, but this seems especially bad. I really do want to see this thing succeed as well, I like the idea, I think Nintendo has done a pretty good job of ensuring that their gimmick games and their actual fucking video games can exist on the same system, but there just isn't much in the way of actual fucking video games. Just a bunch of silly, ridiculously expensive gimmicks.

@haruko: The stuff you're talking about is true for every launch ever, except for the combining of divisions thing, except that's supposed to lead to MORE games, not fewer. Every console has new hardware to learn, a (somewhat) new online infrastructure, a press blitz, and part of the company still supporting the old hardware. And the last Wii U game they're shipping is the same as the first Switch game, so they don't get credit for that (I know that porting does take resources, but not nearly as many as developing a new game.)

I expected more. You say "Most systems have one maybe 2 games worth grabbing at launch" but that wasn't true of Xbox One or PS4. They both launched with very strong lineups. Even Xbox One, a hated console around here, had Dead Rising 3, Battlefield 4, Assassin's Creed 4, Killer Instinct and Lego Marvel Super Heroes. I also personally liked Ryse and think Forza 5 gets a bum rap, though I know a lot of people don't love those games. Now none of those are as good as Zelda looks to be, and most of them were available for other systems, but that's still quite a lot to play on day 1.

And if you have a Wii U then Zelda isn't really worth buying a Switch for since the two versions seem pretty similar in quality.

This is really bad for a modern console launch. Even worse than the Wii U arguably. And Nintendo has not released much for Wii U or even 3DS in the last 12 months so once again...what have their developers been up to? Presumably the game developers are not coding online infrastructure or running their press efforts.

Well yes and to add to this: 2 games worth grabbing, not 2 games that will forever be in your mind. We don't know how good or bad the new Zelda is going to do. But they have a serious shot at being something special. Unlike the launch games on the other consoles.

I'll be very interested to hear the same people's reactions to the launch lineup of the Scorpio and future MS and Sony platforms. For years people were complaining that Resogun was kind of the only reason to turn on their PS4. And on XB1 we saw... Oh yes Killer Instinct. Which is a great game don't get me wrong but that's not even in the same ballpark as the Switch's launch.

I have no idea how many teams Nintendo actually has, but the output seems about right. They have a Zelda team releasing on a Zelda game, a Mario team releasing a Mario game, a gimmick team releasing a gimmick game, a Mario Kart technical team porting Mario Kart, RPGs are coming out. They've hinted at work on a Metroid game. The Pokemon team released a game a couple months ago. That's as good or better than what Microsoft or PlayStation have been doing and the 3rd parties are understandably running away from it.

@rasrimra: Scorpio is just a hardware update for the Xbox One. Its launch line up was years ago.

That would be very disappointing, if they are asking real money for it. Like the same type of money you would pay for a new platform. They would have to have something to show for it. The PS4 Pro had a pretty good start. Sorry I'm turning this into a topic that shouldn't be here. Although that is also the point I'm trying to make. That we can't just criticize Nintendo without looking at how much the rest of the industry is sucking, without looking at what is realistic I mean.

It would be very interesting if the same people that criticize the Switch's line up would get enthusiastic about the Scorpio if it has no better upcoming line up under the guise that it's just an upgrade. Because then they are being fooled. That is why I'm very interested to see how MS is going to offer us a better line up in the first year of the Scorpio than a Zelda, a Mario and Splatoon. And how the people criticizing this line up are going to respond to that.

They're still getting used to the new office.

@rasrimra: I don't think you understand what the Scorpio is. It plays the same games as the Xbox One. The Scorpio already has a library of hundreds of games so a comparison with the Switch doesn't work. It's the same as a PS4 Pro.

I really do wonder if all that talent and resources split up between the 3ds and Wii U will come together for a strong unified line up over time. To be honest, that's the only factor making me even slightly hopeful that Nintendo might do better than the last time around in the console department. The 3ds, in the end, was super strong. The Wii U (sort of) was too. One of those did better than the other, and now that they've (peanut butter in my chocolate)-ed this thing, maybe they stand a chance with the Switch after a while.

Although it's true one of those systems had an immediate backwards compatibility with a library of games that didn't involve gyrating your wrists until they were sore. The ds library came with the 3ds and regardless of any other factors when it launched there was always that to fall back on. The software for the Wii came in with the Wii U as well, but it's not exactly equatable in accessibility. Especially given you still had to whip out those motion controllers and even launch in a separate system UI. It all felt very truncated in a way that sticking a Ds cartridge into a 3ds certainly did not. So that was a long winded way of me saying that the whole, backward compatible library strength point that the 3ds had going into it (and a lesser, but still existing extent with the Wii U) doesn't transfer over to the switch.

Besides predictions based on past choices, and considerations for the upcoming ones, it's no secret that launches are pretty much always dry when it comes to games. I'm sure plenty of people could list a few examples otherwise, but for real no one should be surprised. Of course as consumers, I would never say we should want or expect anything less than a stellar initial offering to incentivise our purchases. The games will come, later on. Until then either buy it cause you're one of those tech enthusiasts who jump on the hype train, or stand with all the other wait and see-ers and buy it in a year or two or three when there's more software to make you go - "I wish I could play that!"

The launch lineup sucks for Wii U owners especially, but for those without a console that only sold 12 million, the Switch has Zelda, a game that will last a while while they work on other games.

Not only that, but Xenoblade 2 will be as big (if not bigger) than Zelda, and the ability to play that JRPG on mobile will be fantastic.

Switch isn't worth it at launch (which might turn it into another Wii U), but it will get the games. Nintendo really should have pushed $250 with 1-2 Switch included, but they are still 100% greed even though their last 2 consoles didn't outsell their predecessors (Wii U vs Wii, 3DS vs DS)

Honestly the software line so far announced for 2017 rivals Wii U in terms of launch (window) support both first and third party.

I was especially surprised by the first party announcement - Nintendo's output for the Wii U was extremely limited in 2016 and most expected them to have moved most resources to Switch projects instead.

The outlook given during the presentation alone moved me from "day one purchase" to "holiday season 2017 earliest" and that one will only happen if they can paint a picture for 2018 that doesn't make me think we are in Wii U territory all over again.

Making games is hard.

Let's all dismiss history and pretend like the Switch is the only console to launch with few games. And let's pretend like every console launch up to this point launched with fantastic games. As fantastic as the prospect of Mario and Zelda at least. Then let's pretend like the games talked about so far will be the only games that release this year.

Or let's just dismiss the entire notion above.

Having Zelda already makes it better than both the PS4 and Xbox One launches. There was very little on those platforms for a good while and those systems survived. Getting AT MINIMUM Zelda, Splatoon and Mario in 9 months is pretty dang good if you ask me, and there's no way they don't have more coming.

@mcfart: Also wasn't Rayman Legends supposed to be a Wii U launch game? The launch lineup is basically Zelda and a pile of nothing.

So wait, dumb question, but did the WiiU actually make good on the "well it's got an upper an lower screen so you can play 3ds games on it" thing or not? I kinda remember my brother playing monster quest on both or something but I don't know if he purchased the game for both systems or something.

The launch lineup isn't crazy. I'm really hoping they drop some big games this E3 that come out that day or a couple months after. I'm still getting one because I'm an insane man. That doesn't change the whole reveal was pretty disappointing. I almost wish they just stuck with that initial switch commercial they released last year.

I would bet on Nintendo only releasing the games they have announced so far in 2017. It's that or they release even less because Mario gets delayed. Maybe the Switch software lineup will become interesting at the end of 2018 with a few third party JRPGs and an announced Nintendo game or 2 but at that point I bet they'll be begging people to buy one. A good thing for anyone who's not impress with their current pitch.

Don't wait for Nintendo to surprise you with interesting software. Their output has been very slow and predictable for the last 10 years. No reason they would change that now especially when you consider they still seem so disconnected on everything else. Nothing surprising is coming as nothing surprising came to the Wii or WiiU.

The system just seems overpriced for what they're offering. $300 just for the system, then a game, then maybe an SD card to upgrade storage, and then maybe a pro controller (fucking 70 bucks seriously?) or some extra joy cons, and maybe a carrying case for the switch/game cartridges, and if you're really feeling frisky an extra dock which somehow costs $90. None of the three control options seem that comfortable either, but I obviously haven't held any myself. Zelda looks great but I have a wii u and I'll just get it on the system it was supposed to come out on originally.

Then there's the idea that they'll charge for online after this intro grace period but I have so many questions about all that because Nintendo really doesn't know how to internet. Also what's the point of only being able to play the free games they give you for one month? On xbox and playstation you keep them as long as you're subscribed and anything you bought at a discount is just yours to keep forever which is how it should fucking work! I get that they want to be family friendly, there's nothing wrong with that, but their desire to make sure no one has a bad time online means I rarely have a good time using any of their online services (friend codes, smash online being a damn slideshow, and now mario run as the latest example of them not getting it right). Then of course there's the battery life, which I feel is really gonna limit this whole taking your games on the go thing.

I'm happy I got a wii u, but it was years after it launched once there were finally enough games to justify it; and I'm a spoiled asshole who gets every system at some point, but if someone could only afford one system per generation there's no way I'd tell them to get a wii u unless they're the most diehard nintendo fan because it just isn't as good a value for the money. Nintendo really seems to have learned no lessons from the past few launches, although at least switch is a better name than Wii U and "New" Nintendo 3DS (jesus fucking christ who though of that?)!

But back to the pricing, just for shits and giggles say I planned on getting the system, two games (we'll say zelda and 1,2 switch), a pro controller, a pack of extra joy cons, and a 128gb sd card ($40 on amazon) to expand the storage; it would cost a total of $610 before tax. And if I really wanted that extra super expensive dock for some reason it'd be an even 700 to basically play zelda and the system launch tech demo with some friends.

There's nothing wrong with ports (I actually loved the vita lineup which had some solid new 1st party stuff and then great ports of fighting games and the like), but it seems like really slim pickings from Nintendo and the Japanese 3rd parties, and western publishers are barely dipping a toe in with stuff like fifa, skylanders, just dance and skyrim. I love skyrim with all my heart, I've played more hours than I care to admit but it'll be coming out on the switch about 6 years after it originally launched, and we just got the special editions on console and they have mod support so the idea of skyrim on the go is kinda neat but I already own the game on 3 systems so I'm good.

Recent history also shows that Nintendo doesn't have a problem with major price drops not too long after they realize they've shat the bed, so I hope the switch ends up being awesome and a successful system for them cus I love Nintendo. But they do so much to piss me off and this pricing and their vagueness about things like online infrastructure and unified accounts has me worried, so I definitely won't be a guinea pig beta tester for them this time around.

tl;dr I agree

Does anyone else find the MODEL NUMBER of the Switch concerning?

I DO.

Model No: HACSKABAA

Clearly there will be a launch bundle containing a collection of minigames featuring hacking, ska, and sheep counting and/or herding - this is all from a verified source... of logic, in my brain.

How WALUIGI of them, I do say!

To me it isn't quite enough because this should be the lone Nintendo console. Maybe it won't actually be that and a pure handheld will actually continue (I think that would be a mistake).

I am someone who couldn't imagine buying hardly any Nintendo console ever at launch so it's kind of what they usually do.

Giant Machines 2, Switch hot sclooosie.

I'm not sure that they have that much more to announce for the "launch window", but I think the most likely thing is that they wanted to save some announcements for E3 this year like Pokemon Sun.

Without a doubt I think Nintendo should have come off Wii thinking, "Well, we don't actually work well with 3rd parties and they just don't get what we are trying to do all the time." And their very next thought, at least in my mind, should have been to create two new large teams and one small team.

At this point I think Nintendo need to admit reality...they don't want to work with 3rd parties. But with that said, they means they NEED and have more of their own development.

They are sitting on a pile of money, but that money is useless if NOT USED. Capital needs to be used to create more business that has the chance to build more capital. Nintendo is being so careful they allowing their business to wither away from neglect masked as caution. The scary parts is they needed to be making smart moves of expansion in 2013 and they didn't, so who know if they even have the time to ramp-up as they should have 4 years ago.

Just stop making hardware and make games only

There was a small Fire Emblem Direct that talked about two new Fire Emblem games on the Switch. Fire Emblem Warriors this year and a new main line FE game for next year. Granted Warriors is also going to be on the New 3DS but usually lower quality to how a home console version. There is also another Fire Emblem game coming out this May as well for 3DS which I believe will be the last big game for the 3DS.

I honestly cannot think of any last gen consoles with an AMAZING line up their first year. I do not recall the Xbox One and PS4 having a good first year or even a decent second year. Last console I believe that had an amazing launch was the original Xbox with Halo as a big system seller.

Granted with how low WiiUs sold (imo I had a good value with all the things I bought for it) I can believe that Zelda will be a great console seller for people who did not get a WiiU.

Its been this way for some time now. I wonder if this is the console that ushers in a Nintendo that only releases software. I don't really want to buy a console and deal with their shitty services to play Mario 2006 and the next Zelda they crap out. Nintendo has played it so safe that they are stale and they don't seem to understand why their old games were fun. IE: see how Paper Mario 1k Door had tons of cool and fun character and the most recent one has only Toads for some reason. Why? From what I've heard, Nintendo doesn't even like the same games we liked.

At this point other people have iterated on their games better than they have.